I see from the T&A article that Wolford so kindly posted that the Deputy Leader of the Council and Councillor responsible for Community Safety is Asian. Isn't that just typical! They come here, serving the community with civic responsibility and all manner of ideas about public service. Bloody do gooders! Why can't they just mix in, assimilate and be moaning bigots like normal people?

I see from the T&A article that Wolford so kindly posted that the Deputy Leader of the Council and Councillor responsible for Community Safety is Asian. Isn't that just typical! They come here, serving the community with civic responsibility and all manner of ideas about public service. Bloody do gooders! Why can't they just mix in, assimilate and be moaning bigots like normal people?

The gentleman in question ... Councillor Imran Hussain ... was most helpful to my neighbours and I when we were objecting to a recent (in our view dodgy) planning application that Bradford Council has subsequently approved. I am very grateful for his efforts and would definitely vote for him if he was my ward councillor.

Two of our own ward councillors wrote in support of our objections but didn't attend the appeal panel meeting. Councillor Hussain was at the meeting and insisted that we were given a fair chance to air our views and that the appeal panel should visit the proposed development site before ratifying the planning consent. I did verbally thank him for his efforts and, on reflection, wish that I had confirmed it in writing.

It is worth noting that the only detrimental comments that I have ever heard or read about Councillor Hussain were in the Respect Party's election literature when he stood against George Galloway in the Bradford West parliamentary by-election.

There seems to be a common conception on this board that I am racially prejudiced. I am not, I just object to certain ethnic groupings flouting the accepted social, legal and financial mores of Great Britain.

I'm not accusing you of racial prejudice but you do seem highly selective.Would you like to describe the ethnic group who flout the financial mores of this country, as described above, by avoiding an estimated £75 billion in taxes each year?

Derby City -It's our Silver Anniversary! Proud to be flying the flag for Rugby League in the Midlands for 25 years.

I'm not accusing you of racial prejudice but you do seem highly selective.Would you like to describe the ethnic group who flout the financial mores of this country, as described above, by avoiding an estimated £75 billion in taxes each year?

I don't approve of tax evasion so long as the taxation system is equitable. I pay my taxes and my earnings don't place me in the category of a top-band taxpayer. As such, I'm not really qualified to give a personal perspective of relevant tax-avoidance schemes.

Are your figures correct? it strikes me that the population of this country is around 65 million. At a generous estimate, 40 million people would be in a position to be liable to pay income tax. £75 billion divided by 40million equates to an averaged tax avoidance of ~ £2000 per taxpayer.

Tax avoidance schemes don't generally avoid the paying of all taxes; they just reduce the total paid to the exchequer. If I could legitimately avoid paying an extra £2000 per annum to this government, I would. I reckon most of our other board members would, given the opportunity, also do so.

Anyone who takes out a private pension or an ISA is effectively subscribing to a tax-avoidance scheme.

What evidence do you have that a single ethnic group of individuals is applying and taking advantage of these £75 billion tax avoidance schemes?

I don't approve of tax evasion so long as the taxation system is equitable. I pay my taxes and my earnings don't place me in the category of a top-band taxpayer. As such, I'm not really qualified to give a personal perspective of relevant tax-avoidance schemes.

Are your figures correct? it strikes me that the population of this country is around 65 million. At a generous estimate, 40 million people would be in a position to be liable to pay income tax. £75 billion divided by 40million equates to an averaged tax avoidance of ~ £2000 per taxpayer.

Tax avoidance schemes don't generally avoid the paying of all taxes; they just reduce the total paid to the exchequer. If I could legitimately avoid paying an extra £2000 per annum to this government, I would. I reckon most of our other board members would, given the opportunity, also do so.

Anyone who takes out a private pension or an ISA is effectively subscribing to a tax-avoidance scheme.

What evidence do you have that a single ethnic group of individuals is applying and taking advantage of these £75 billion tax avoidance schemes?

it was you that linked "certain ethnic groups" to the financial mores of this country, not me.

The figures are a government estimate, not mine.

You do not seen to understand the meaning of. tax evasion and its legality. Hence your point about. ISAs etc. is totally irrelevant.

Derby City -It's our Silver Anniversary! Proud to be flying the flag for Rugby League in the Midlands for 25 years.

No they are not, the government has decreed that those are not taxable, therefore there is no tax to avoid. you are just putting your money where the government wants you to.

Exactly. There was a guy from one of the companies who dream up these schemes in front of a Parliamentary committee the other day. He freely admitted that his job was to find new loopholes. As HMRC closes one avoidance scheme, he dreams up another. There is no similarity between his activity and ISA's.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014

Anyone who takes out a private pension or an ISA is effectively subscribing to a tax-avoidance scheme.

You do not seen to understand the meaning of. tax evasion and its legality. Hence your point about. ISAs etc. is totally irrelevant.

No they are not, the government has decreed that those are not taxable, therefore there is no tax to avoid. you are just putting your money where the government wants you to.

Exactly. There was a guy ... freely admitted that his job was to find new loopholes ... There is no similarity between his activity and ISA's.

Hypocrisy Rules. OK!

I am self-employed and have both a private pension scheme and an ISA policy. Just because I subscribe to Government-authorised tax-avoidance doesn't stop it being tax-avoidance. The same goes for anyone else on this board who has the financial prudence to subscribe to these schemes.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to add to these investments for the past three years because of prevailing economics. If I had remained as a public sector employee, those economics would not have affected me ... I'd have an annual pay rise and my pension contributions would have been maintained by the public purse ... i.e. by the other members of this forum. There's no point in whingeing, I made my choice and am happy to live with it. There's always next year to look forward to.

However, if I do have a decent next year, HMRC wouldn't give a monkeys about the past three years and would have every last drop of recoverable taxation if I didn't have the common sense to add to my pension scheme and ISA.

It's easy to point the tax-avoidance finger at high-earning freelance workers such as Jimmy Carr, Bradley Wiggins and the like, but much harder to admit that you'd do the same in their position.

I am self-employed and have both a private pension scheme and an ISA policy. Just because I subscribe to Government-authorised tax-avoidance doesn't stop it being tax-avoidance. The same goes for anyone else on this board who has the financial prudence to subscribe to these schemes.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to add to these investments for the past three years because of prevailing economics. If I had remained as a public sector employee, those economics would not have affected me ... I'd have an annual pay rise and my pension contributions would have been maintained by the public purse ... i.e. by the other members of this forum. There's no point in whingeing, I made my choice and am happy to live with it. There's always next year to look forward to.

However, if I do have a decent next year, HMRC wouldn't give a monkeys about the past three years and would have every last drop of recoverable taxation if I didn't have the common sense to add to my pension scheme and ISA.

It's easy to point the tax-avoidance finger at high-earning freelance workers such as Jimmy Carr, Bradley Wiggins and the like, but much harder to admit that you'd do the same in their position.

Not at all; this country's welfare state and public service provision is the envy of the world and must be preserved. I am happy to pay a reasonable proportion of my income in tax.

However, that doesn't mean that I agree with the way that the application and control of public money is currently being disbursed, and consider that there should be stricter controls. One way of ensuring stricter control is for the budget for certain aspects of the national purse (e.g. foreign aid, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, free mobility cars every 3 years, handouts to immigrants) to be curtailed by a difficulty in the exchequer obtaining unlimited funds. In my opinion, much of the funds for these aspects have been largely culled from the higher education budget, with students no longer getting grants and free university fees. Hard working parents and grandparents now have to fund their childrens education and it is effectively a lever to price the working class out of an education.

I am already committed to paying tax (including income tax, Vat, fuel tax, corporation tax etc); however, for the reason above, I am also keen on minimising the cumulative levy.

On a personal level, using a scheme to reduce income tax liability is no different to changing your car for one that uses less fuel and/or carries a lower road fund tax.

Its not completely a myth though. People can get brand new cars every year for the slightest disability - how is that reasonable? Why does everyone on disability have to have a new car? What's wrong with a decent one?

I know a guy, who has been on the sick since the early 80's with 'tennis elbow'. Every year since 1988 (at least) he has had a new 'people carrier' type car. Why he needs this is anyones guess but he does because he can, probably edged on by the dealership. Of course, this doesn't mean the scheme should be scrapped, many people benefit from such a scheme. But if we're struggling for cash in the NHS, then a clampdown on pee takers is a reasonable start.